Skip to main content

Modes of Belief in God






I was thinking recently about the different ways that different theists complete the phrase "I believe in God because...."  Thinking here of the reflective believers, those who are interested in answering the question, not those who, say, simply adopted the beliefs passed on to them as children and have never questioned them.


Adopting the pronoun "Him" from convention and for convenience.


1. Mystics: "I believe in God because I am personally in touch with Him."


2.  Mysticists: "I believe in God because the last guy who spoke is credible, and until I have my own such experience I rely upon his."


3. Rationalists: "I believe in God because logically sound proofs, from plausible premises, lead to the inference that He exists."


4. Fideists: "I choose to believe in God despite the fact that there is no very powerful because."


The fideists can presumably be subdivided further. Even if there is no overpowering "because" there may be reasons that create some lesser degree of inclination toward this particular choice, and those could be stated.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.



We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…

Hume's Cutlery

David Hume is renowned for two pieces of cutlery, the guillotine and the fork.

Hume's guillotine is the sharp cut he makes between "is" statements and "ought" statements, to make the point that the former never ground the latter.

His "fork" is the division between what later came to be called "analytic" and "synthetic" statements, with the ominous observation that any books containing statements that cannot be assigned to one or the other prong should be burnt.

Actually, I should acknowledge that there is some dispute as to how well or poorly the dichotomy Hume outlines really maps onto the analytic/synthetic dichotomy. Some writers maintain that Hume meant something quite different and has been hijacked. Personally, I've never seen the alleged difference however hard they've worked to point it out to me.

The guillotine makes for a more dramatic graphic than a mere fork, hence the bit of clip art above.

I'm curious whe…